Pleasurably better, not measurably better

Those deeply engrained in the scientific and engineering communities are disciplined to defend their positions with hard data.

I think there are a lot of people who want to play at being scientists or engineers when they defend their technocratic positions on audio.  The giveaway is when they attempt to make claims about metrics that are simply not in evidence.

Lower THD for instance.  Not proven to sound better and under some circumstances higher may be preferred.  Like measuring the hardness of a metal.  Yes, we can measure hardness, but is harder better?  That's a different issue and judged by application.  Measuring hardness is an engineering discipline, but claiming it is universally better is outside the scope of the discipline.

Also want to point out that Harman, and JBL and I think Floyd Toole have done actual research on audio and human preference.  It is not impossible to research this, and come to an idea about consumer preferences.  It doesn't always align with pure technocracy.

Bose for instance is an organization that, like it or not, knows a lot about consumer listening preferences.  You and I may not fit their demographic, but if you don't believe they know the sound that sells at a store you are sadly mistaken.  Please don't argue Bose good or bose Bad. I only want to talk about Pleasurable research.  it exists, and it's not the same as technocratic quests for minimal this maximal that.  It's quite complicated.

I am always impressed with the level of precision music listeners will use to modify their spaces to get that perfect sound. I also admit that I am just too lazy to follow similar methods. 

@femoore12 True! Speaking for myself, I tend to modify the sound to get the perfect space.

Only yesterday I fiddled around with an EQ, using long cables do I could sit on the sofa with it. It really improves the sound = the space (living room) = listening experience.

@erik_squires 

If you ONLY treat first reflection points I can barely hear any benefit at all.  It is only when the room overall has enough treatment to quiet it down that the 1st reflection points matter.

That makes a lot of sense, and matches some of my experiences. Truth be told, even though I sell acoustic treatments I'm not necessarily as experienced with listening directly to the effects they have as many of my customers and other people are who have the means to employ extensive treatments in their rooms and experiment a lot. I have set up the sound room we have here with increasing amounts of treatment and noticed that at a certain point where all the walls were well treated and the floor was treated as well, that's when the room walls "disappearing" effect really started to work for me, making for a quite compelling listening experience. Unfortunately that setup had to be disassembled as we were getting overwhelmed with stock we couldn't move out because of a shortage of shipping containers. Right now the room is set up with a studio mixing/mastering AttackWall arrangement. That is interesting to listen to and compare to my recollection of the hifi setup. I like the AttackWall because it's clear, clean and precise but it doesn't create the ambient effect that the full room treatment did. I enjoy it but in a different way.